United States v. Francisco Andres-Francisco
This text of 535 F. App'x 599 (United States v. Francisco Andres-Francisco) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Federal prisoner Francisco Andres-Francisco appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Andres-Francisco contends counsel’s failure to file a notice of appeal constituted constitutionally deficient performance. We review a district court’s denial of a section 2255 motion de novo. See United States v. Manzo, 675 F.3d 1204, 1209 (9th Cir.2012). The district court properly denied the motion because Andres-Francisco has not shown that there is a reasonable probability that he would have appealed had his trial attorney consulted with him explicitly about the merits of appealing his criminal history calculation. See Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 484-86, 120 S.Ct. 1029, 145 L.Ed.2d 985 (2000).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
535 F. App'x 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-francisco-andres-francisco-ca9-2013.